Editorial: Farmworker housing dilemma needs county¹s attention

The decision to drop plans for a seasonal farmworker housing
project in Geyserville is a disappointing development and
underscores the social and political dilemma of providing adequate
housing for vineyard workers in the north county and throughout
Sonoma County.
Burbank Housing, the county¹s largest and most successful
non-profit affordable housing developer, has now tried to build a
large, seasonal farmworker project in three locations, Cloverdale,
Sonoma and Geyserville, and faced such opposition in each case that
plans were dropped.
All three proposed projects were in close proximity to urban
services and could accommodate the sewer and water requirements of
a 60-bed housing facility. They were close to work sites ‹ in
Geyserville¹s case in the heart of the Alexander Valley. From a
practical and good planning standpoint, the projects made
sense.
They all faced opposition from residents who didn¹t want a
project in their neighborhood. Given the controversial nature of
the projects, Burbank is now shifting its focus to more rural
locations. But there they will face a hurdle with county
regulations that limit a project of this kind to 38 beds and a
six-month operating period. It will be up to county officials, and
the leadership of Supervisor Paul Kelley, to amend county
regulations to accommodate larger facilities that can begin to meet
the need for farmworker housing.
On a smaller scale, many growers are able to house workers in
vineyard areas. But the need for housing, particularly for seasonal
workers, is far greater than the supply that is available and
larger projects are needed.
Even with a shift toward more rural locations, we anticipate
that Burbank Housing will still face opposition. We believe Burbank
officials have a responsibility to work more effectively in
educating residents about their projects and addressing concerns in
advance of the kind of large public meeting in Geyserville last
week that drew an angry, and perhaps uninformed, crowd.
Farmworker housing projects face the same ³not in my backyard²
reaction that many low-income housing projects face. That reaction
is not only troubling, but terribly ironic considering that the
backyards in question are vineyards whose grapes would not get
picked, or whose vines would not get pruned without farmworkers.
These are the same farmworkers who need a decent place to sleep
when they are done working in the fields. In whose backyard do they
belong when they need to sleep?
The problem of farmworker housing is not just Geyserville¹s, or
the county¹s or the growers¹ or winegrowers, it is everyone¹s. It
will take a concerted effort by farmworker advocates, wine industry
leaders and public officials to meet the farmworker housing needs
in a way that can be accepted by the communities in which they are
located.
‹ Barry W. Dugan